Forget David Bowie- the V&A’s 'Treasures at the Royal Courts' exhibition is is where the real magic is…

Queen and Lover are Re-united at the V&A’s Latest Show

By A. Crossland

The Victoria and Albert's new exhibition ‘Treasures of the Royal Courts: Tudors, Stuarts and Russian Tsars’ chronicles centuries of Royal extravagance in gifts, gifts which  often travelled thousands of miles in order to impress foreign dignitaries in far away lands. From Ivan the Terrible, through the courts of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, and ending with the Stuart monarchs, this exhibition displays some 150 exhibits from both Russian and English Royal courts. On exclusive loan from the Moscow Kremlin Museum is an extensive collection of disgustingly ornate silverware given to the Russian Tsars by English monarchs. The skill displayed in the execution of these colossal wine jugs, platters and serving dishes fills the red walled rooms of the V&A with a shining, glittering light. Surely no modern machinery could ever make works of art such as these.

 The glamour of the Elizabethan joust is displayed in the detailed designs for the head to toe armour worn by such men as Sir Christopher Hatton, in honour of their most beloved Virgin Queen.

A beautifully executed drawing of armour made for Sir Christopher Hatton. Unfortunately the original does not survive. Image: Royal Armouries

A portrait of Sir Christopher Hatton, with exquisite detail to the luxurious cloth used for his clothes. In his hand he holds a miniature, with the profile of his beloved Queen Elizabeth on it. Inside the outer casing of the miniature would be another painting of the Queen. Miniatures were considered to be very precious and intimate gifts.

Henry VIII’s armour is also on display, catching in the eye in a different way, as it confirms the King’s rather excessive lifestyle; and waistband.

 



Queen Elizabeth I, Image: Philip Mould

Portraits in this exhibition highlight how the painted form was used in a conscious way to confirm the sitters’ power status. In the days before any formal propaganda or public representation existed, portraits were the language of social power. Works copied and engraved were shipped across the continent to inspire and impress foreign counterparts. This dialogue of works helped to inspire artists and spread artistic development across the world.













Yet portraits could also speak the language of love. Reunited on the walls of the V&A are two figures forever bound by their historic passion for each other. I am talking of course about Queen Elizabeth I and her most beloved and adored Courtier- Lord Robert Dudley, 1^st Earl of Leicester. 

Robert Dudley, 1st Earl Leceister. The two heraldic devices inform the viewer of Dudley's fine pedigree. The dog symbolises fidelity and loyalty.



Having seen and studied these paintings separately for so long, it seems rather odd to force them together in the naturally contrived space of the exhibition. It becomes hard to imagine the real people that lived and breathed under those restrictive court costumes and behind those frozen faces. Yet the life of opulence and luxury that the Royal Court acted out during these times lives on in the objects they left behind. The gifts traded across nations speak volumes: about the style of the time, about impressive native craftsmanship, and about the cultural, political and even personal messages that they carried with them.

The Drake Jewel. Image: elizabethan-portraits.com

The same can be said for the exquisite jewels, miniatures and gems on display here, especially the Drake Jewel, which is undoubtedly one of the nation’s most precious treasures.

My only regret about the execution of this exhibition is the inclusion of rather rudimentary and simply worded descriptions to the objects. The V&A could have gone a lot further in discussing the symbolic nature of many of the elements in the paintings, jewels and other objects on display. The symbolic language of Court life during these times is surely one of the most fascinating elements of this historical period. To leave these signs unaddressed means that the underlying message of these diplomatic gifts is lost to a society that can no longer read the signs themselves.

http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/exhibitions/treasures-of-the-royal-courts/about_the_exhibition/
'Treasures of the Royal Courts: Tudors, Stuarts and Russian Tsars' runs from 9th March-14th July 2013.
TICKET PRICES:
General admission: £14
Student: £7
Art Fund: £4.70
 

What are the Issues Raised by the Ethnographic Displays at the Pitt Rivers Museum?

The Pitt Rivers Museum houses one of the most important collections of anthropological and archaeological objects in the country. The museum can be seen as a fascinating insight into foreign cultures and traditions, as ‘a new way of looking at the ordered cosmos’. Yet it can also been argued that it is a Colonial treasure chest of objects taken from their indigenous origins and used to highlight the ‘truth’ of evolution and the progression of the human species. Are there ‘truths’ revealed in the Pitt River’s museum display?

The Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford was founded in 1884 by a leading anthropological figure of the day, General Pitt River, who donated his collection of 18,000 objects to Oxford University. Now the collection has reached over half a million, and is housed in an impressive Victorian building. The entrance is now through the Oxford University Museum of Natural History, where you enter to a low lit court with a large totem pole dominating the space. The original explorer or anthropologist donated many of the objects, and hundreds of objects are crammed into the original display cases.

The layout of the museum is unusual in that instead of housing objects together by country or culture, they have been divided into rough ‘types’. For example in the ‘Animal Forms in Art’ cabinet, you see small animal sculptures from Malaya, next to Canada, next to Greece next to China. This decision was originally due to the influence of Pitt Rivers himself, who wanted the museum to have an evolutionary purpose, and to show how societies evolve from simple to complex.

In effect, this method completely de-contextualises the objects, and distanced from their original purpose, they take on a new meaning within the museum complex. They take on the role of defining the foreign cultures on show as the ‘Other’ to the sophisticated European society.  On display there are few European objects, and even less from Great Britain.

In 2009 the museum re-opened after a ten-month long overhaul, in which more of the original display was re-established. The now dimly lit central court is explored by torches which are provided by the museum. This gives a sense of adventure to visitors’ self guided visit, and is especially popular with the children, who are further involved in the museum experience with craft activities, trails and activities sheets. As there are no long winded descriptive panels, you are left to draw your own conclusions as to the origins and uses of the objects

Another issue raised in this museum space is the treatment of sensitive materials, which originally had magical or religious purposes. One of the most visited displays at the Pitt Rivers is the ‘Treatment of Dead Enemies’, which has so many objects it needs two display cases. These seem to be constantly surrounded by curious spectators. One case in particular houses examples of skull trophies taken by various tribes, many from New Guinea, as well as the famous shrunken heads from the Upper Amazon. This ghoulish spectacle certainly draws in the crowds. However, this display raises questions about the origins of these objects. Now objects of curiosity, they were once living being, and this creating this spectacle of death could be seen as insensitive and disrespectful.

Exploring the darkened cabinets of the Pitt Rivers is undoubtedly a fascinating adventure. Yet it raises questions about what voice it gives the original claimants of these objects. I personally think, even in the limited space, more could be done to contextualize these objects. Without it, this collection of material culture could be forming a Colonial-esque outlook which silences those cultures considered to be less civilized and less advanced. Do the original cultures still have a claim to these objects, or have they become part of the makeup of this museum? Despite the aim of the museum to have an educational purpose, these objects to do necessarily teach truths without context and instruction. They become objects of exotic beauty and fantasy, almost passing into the realm of fiction.